H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Samantha Stosur vs Serena Williams H2H: 5-7
Serena Williams holds a 7–5 lead over Samantha Stosur in their WTA head-to-head. Across 12 main-draw meetings, Serena Williams leads 6–4 on hard courts, while they are tied 1–1 on clay. Most recently, Samantha Stosur won the 2014 Beijing quarterfinal DEF.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUS
Age 42
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
5
–
7
12 main draw meetings
USA
Age 44
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 4, 2014* | Beijing | WTA 1000 | QF | Hard | Samantha Stosur | (def.) | Serena Williams | Match data |
| Aug 14, 2014* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Serena Williams | 7-6(7) 7-6(7) | Samantha Stosur | Match data |
| Aug 7, 2014* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Serena Williams | 6-0 6-2 | Samantha Stosur | Match data |
| Apr 7, 2012* | Charleston | WTA 500 | SF | Clay | Serena Williams | 6-1 6-1 | Samantha Stosur | Match data |
| Mar 23, 2012* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Serena Williams | 7-5 6-3 | Samantha Stosur | Match data |
| Sep 11, 2011* | US Open | Grand Slam | F | Hard | Samantha Stosur | 6-2 6-3 | Serena Williams | Match data |
| Aug 18, 2011* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Samantha Stosur | (w/o) | Serena Williams | Match data |
| Aug 8, 2011 | Toronto | WTA 1000 | F | Hard | Serena Williams | 6-4 6-2 | Samantha Stosur | Match data |
| Jun 2, 2010* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | QF | Clay | Samantha Stosur | 6-2 6-7(2) 8-6 | Serena Williams | Match data |
| Jan 26, 2010* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Serena Williams | 6-4 6-2 | Samantha Stosur | Match data |
| Aug 1, 2009* | Stanford | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Samantha Stosur | 6-2 3-6 6-2 | Serena Williams | Match data |
| Jan 15, 2009* | Sydney | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Serena Williams | 6-3 6-7(4) 7-5 | Samantha Stosur | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samantha Stosur | #531 | #4 | 6,195 | 2,068 | 451 | 335 | 57.4% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 9 |
| Serena Williams | #320 | #1 | 13,615 | 2,405 | 825 | 170 | 82.9% | 23 | 23 | 5 | 17 | 3 | 71 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Samantha Stosur | Serena Williams | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #101 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 26–11 | 70.3% | #20 | 1,895 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 37–7 | 84.1% | #4 | 2,170 | 1 | 4 |
| 18 | 2002 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #245 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 37–8 | 82.2% | #6 | 2,174 | 1 | 7 |
| 19 | 2003 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #163 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 40–7 | 85.1% | #6 | 2,259 | 1 | 10 |
| 20 | 2004 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #65 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 57–5 | 91.9% | #1 | 2,348 | 4 | 18 |
| 21 | 2005 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #46 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 36–3 | 92.3% | #3 | 2,369 | 6 | 22 |
| 22 | 2006 | 29–24 | 54.7% | #29 | 1,749 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 39–11 | 78.0% | #7 | 2,192 | 6 | 24 |
| 23 | 2007 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 21–9 | 70.0% | #11 | 2,028 | 7 | 25 |
| 24 | 2008 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #52 | 1,746 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 12–4 | 75.0% | #95 | 2,016 | 7 | 25 |
| 25 | 2009 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 34–10 | 77.3% | #7 | 2,058 | 8 | 27 |
| 26 | 2010 | 43–19 | 69.4% | #6 | 1,927 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 41–8 | 83.7% | #2 | 2,109 | 9 | 31 |
| 27 | 2011 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #6 | 1,977 | 1 | 3 | 2009 | 50–13 | 79.4% | #1 | 2,106 | 11 | 34 |
| 28 | 2012 | 40–23 | 63.5% | #9 | 1,883 | 1 | 3 | 2010 | 25–4 | 86.2% | #4 | 2,149 | 13 | 36 |
| 29 | 2013 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #18 | 1,902 | 1 | 5 | 2011 | 22–4 | 84.6% | #12 | 2,155 | 13 | 38 |
| 30 | 2014 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #22 | 1,883 | 1 | 6 | 2012 | 48–6 | 88.9% | #3 | 2,239 | 15 | 44 |
| 31 | 2015 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #27 | 1,789 | 1 | 8 | 2013 | 77–5 | 93.9% | #1 | 2,345 | 17 | 55 |
| 32 | 2016 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #21 | 1,716 | 1 | 8 | 2014 | 52–10 | 83.9% | #1 | 2,209 | 18 | 62 |
| 33 | 2017 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #41 | 1,734 | 1 | 9 | 2015 | 50–6 | 89.3% | #1 | 2,197 | 21 | 67 |
| 34 | 2018 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #74 | 1,663 | 1 | 9 | 2016 | 36–5 | 87.8% | #2 | 2,177 | 22 | 69 |
| 35 | 2019 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #99 | 1,631 | 1 | 9 | 2017 | 8–1 | 88.9% | #22 | 2,172 | 23 | 70 |
| 36 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #112 | 1,607 | 1 | 9 | 2018 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #16 | 2,078 | 23 | 70 |
| 37 | 2021 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #382 | 1,522 | 1 | 9 | 2019 | 25–8 | 75.8% | #10 | 2,052 | 23 | 70 |
| 38 | 2022 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #529 | 1,511 | 1 | 9 | 2020 | 16–5 | 76.2% | #11 | 1,991 | 23 | 71 |
| 39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 12–6 | 66.7% | #41 | 1,950 | 23 | 71 |
| 40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #320 | 1,891 | 23 | 71 |
| 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #320 | — | 23 | 71 |